In two letters sent to People for the
Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) during March,
Burger King outlined its new supply guidelines. It
has begun buying 2% of its eggs from cage-free operations,
increasing the amount to 5% by 2008. It is also obtaining
10% of the pig meat it uses from operations that do
not use gestation crates, and will double it to 20%
by the end of the year. The company said those percentages
will rise as competitively priced supplies become
available. To encourage their production, a “purchasing
preference” for them has also been implemented.
Additionally, suppliers who use controlled atmosphere
killing (CAK) to slaughter chickens will be favored.
(Most of the few slaughterplants that already employ
CAK kill turkeys.) The new guidelines are to apply
to suppliers in the U.S. and Canada. Menu prices will
not be increased because of the changes.

Both PETA and, more recently, The Humane
Society of the U.S. have been pressuring Burger King.
While both were consulted about the guidelines, the
company said it ultimately relied on the advise of
its animal welfare advisory board. “The announcement
is the latest in a series of successes for activists,
perhaps allowing them to move away from the fringes
of American politics and closer to the mainstream,”
wrote Chuck Jolley, an industry commentator. Bob Goldin,
executive vice president of Technomic, a food industry
research and consulting firm, said of the announcement:
“I think that the industry is going to see that
it’s an increasing imperative to get on [the
social responsibility] bandwagon.” PETA’s
Matt
Prescott concurred, also stating: "We certainly
hope that people will order the BK Veggie Burger when
they go into Burger King". A timeline of associated
key events, compiled by PETA, can be found at: http://tinyurl.com/2plsog.
See also CNBC’s “On the Money” video
report: http://tinyurl.com/3dh3fh.
The National Pork Promotion & Research Board plans
to send materials to retailers explaining the industry’s
animal welfare practices: http://tinyurl.com/3bovd2

In a Week in Review article entitled
“Being Nice to the Bacon, Before You Bring it
Home,” New York Times writer Paul Vitello notes:
“When Burger King announced last week that it
would favor producers who treated their animals more
humanely it was welcome news to animal welfare advocates.
But it also served to remind the rest of us that if
we are meat eaters, we are slaughterers, too. At least
by proxy.” (For a view “To the Contrary”
of that presented in Vitello’s article, see:
http://tinyurl.com/2vcf6z
) Author and playwright Marlene Fanta Shyer touches
on this as well in an op-ed entitled “Pork:
The Other Guilty Meat,” published in the Christian
Science Monitor. She writes: "’It's only
a pig,’ you say? We will go to any lengths to
save a baby bird that has fallen from its nest. Yet,
when it comes to the remarkably intelligent creatures
that we carve up for dinner plates, we shrug.”
While not ready to stop eating them, Shyer urges that
“…all pigs [be allowed to] roam free on
every farm in America, and the methods of slaughter
become universally humane…”

In the San Jose Mercury News, Mike Markarian writes
that The Humane Society of the U.S. (which he is with)
is calling on the pig and veal industries to stop
confining animals in crates. Noting pending California
legislation (AB59), Markarian asserts that “federal
and state lawmakers have a responsibility to implement
policy changes as well.” He explains: “Congress
decided nearly a half-century ago, with the Humane
Methods of Slaughter Act of 1958, that farm animals
must have a decent death, but there are virtually
no laws ensuring that farm animals have a decent life
before they meet their end,” in his op-ed entitled
“It’s Time to Ensure Farm Animals Have
a Merciful Life.”

At the Northeastern Regional Pork Conference,
held in February 2007, Kelly Zering, an Associate
Professor and Extension Specialist in the Department
of Agricultural and Resource Economics at North Carolina
State University, considered the future of the North
Carolina pig industry. According to Zering: “To
the extent that the shift away from gestation crates
raises production costs, it would reduce the comparative
advantage of swine producers in the U.S. and Canada
versus other countries…A new initiative to create
the next generation of swine housing is needed to
address the concerns of animal welfare, manure management,
air emissions, odor, and public health. A number of
the innovations that created the current generation
of swine housing occurred in North Carolina (e.g.
slatted floors). The ingenuity and will to innovate
create a comparative advantage for North Carolina.”

In Oregon, SB694, would impose a maximum
of one year's imprisonment or a $6,250 fine or both
for confining pigs or calves in a stall that restricts
the animals' ability to turn around freely in a complete
circle without touching any side of an enclosure.
Effectively banning both gestation and farrowing crates,
the bill, if passed, would take effect in five years:
http://tinyurl.com/2y7l2j.
The New Hampshire House of Representatives rejected
a bill requiring that cages used for egg production
be large enough to allow poultry the ability to spread
their wings. Another bill requiring that the state
buy eggs only from producers who don’t confine
hens in small cages was also killed: http://tinyurl.com/2apjvd.

FUTURE OF THE SWINE INDUSTRY IN NORTH
CAROLINA
North Carolina State University, Kelly Zering, March
2007http://tinyurl.com/2mstt6

4.
DAIRY PRODUCTION GUIDELINES; "UNHAPPY COWS"

Dairy Farmers of America has announced
it will begin recognizing farms that meet its “Gold
Standard” for milk-quality and animal-care guidelines.
The association’s intent is to prevent customers
like Wal-Mart from dictating standards: http://tinyurl.com/2gqf8h.
In March, Horizon Organic published its “Standards
of Care” guidelines for practices on its dairy
farms. Among them are: raising calves from certified
organic “mothers” to ensure generational
organic herd integrity, and “ensuring that cows
are outside year-round to exercise, socialize and
interact with the land.” Horizon worked with
third-party specialists to develop the standards,
which are now said to be in effect on its farms in
Idaho and Maryland. The company has been under fire
from critics for its “factory farming”
practices: http://tinyurl.com/29dalt.

In a detailed article subtitled “California's
Most Unhappy Cows,” Jason Hribal tells of the
history of commercial dairy production and the advent
of dry-lot dairying. He considers “anthroarchy,
or rule by humankind” and how “as much
as this rule has been enforced, it has been contested
by cows, pigs, horses, and even a few humans.”
He additionally considers the history and use of the
word "anthropomorphism." Hribal states:
“The California Milk Advisory Board currently
spends about $37 million per year on advertising for
their ‘Happy Cow Campaign,’ noting that
“this is the same group of people who publicly
deny that cows have any emotions or intellect.”
Considering that “60% of California's 1.5 million
cows work on high-density feed-lots” Hribal
declares: “no creature could ever be cheerful
on a dry-lot. California's cows are most unhappy.”
(See also “Cows, Colonialism, and Capitalism:
Interview with David Nibert”: http://www.animalvoices.ca/node/261 )

Finding that the agency did not follow
required procedures, a federal appeals court has ruled
against the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s
plan to inspect horse slaughter at industry -rather
than taxpayer- expense, halting operation of the nation’s
last functioning horse slaughterplant. The ruling
was in response to a lawsuit filed last year by six
animal protection organizations (see: http://tinyurl.com/j75hb
). “In blatant disregard of congressional intent,
the Agriculture Department devised a ‘fee-for-service’
scheme whereby the horsemeat industry, not taxpayers,
would finance the inspections,” the Washington
Times editorialized, “The matter went to court,
and finally this week the U.S. District Court threw
out USDA's attempt to get around Congress. The players
in opposition included the cattle industry, which
believed that free-range horses damaged grazing lands;
foreign horseflesh producers and consumers; and of
course regulators who stood to lose ‘business.’”

The Times editorial concludes: “Pending in
Congress currently are two bills (H.R. 503 and S.
311 [the American Horse Slaughter Prevention Act (AHSPA)])
to prohibit the transport of American horses across
the border to Mexico for slaughter. These, too, should
pass, or else we've simply averted our eyes without
preventing the slaughter and abuse of the noble steed.”
The remaining slaughterplant, located in Illinois,
slaughtered about 1,000 horses a week. Rescue groups
offered to place the 200 horses at the plant when
the ruling came down but the plant instead sent the
horses back to Colorado, Iowa, South Dakota and Tennessee.
Ruth McLaughlin, information chairperson for the Muskingum
County [Ohio] Farm Bureau, argues: “The average
capacity of a horse adoption facility in the U.S.
is 30 animals. This means in the first year alone,
the U.S. would need an additional 2,700 such facilities,
according to the American Association of Equine Practitioners.
It would cost $1,900 per year to house each unwanted
and abandoned horse, not including veterinary or farrier
services. It will cost $127 million to properly care
for these animals if [the AHSPA] is enacted.”
She warns: “The prohibition on processing equine
will create a negative precedent for other animal
protein segments such as beef, pork and poultry,”

The horse slaughter industry is considering
appealing the recent ruling. In late March, shortly
after the Humane Society of the U.S. (HSUS) filed
a notice of intent to sue the Illinois slaughterplant
for dozens of violations of the federal Clean Water
Act, an Illinois legislative committee approved legislation
to ban horse slaughter by an 8-4 vote. The Congressional
Act that cut federal funding for horse slaughter expires
in September. Animal protection organizations are
lobbying Congress to pass the AHSPA in order to bring
the matter to an end. A timeline of the controversy
over the last two years, along with a list of points
about horse slaughter, has been posted on the HSUS
site (see below).

FEDERAL COURT ORDERS USDA TO HALT INSPECTION
OF HORSES FOR SLAUGHTER
The Humane Society of the United States, March 29,
2007http://tinyurl.com/2zbcvq